On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:15 AM, John W. Linville <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 05:56:33PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Kmemleak shows the following kind of memory leak for ath9k_htc: >> > >> > unreferenced object 0xffff88004542f200 (size 512): >> > comm "khubd", pid 977, jiffies 4317632516 (age 16855.868s) >> > hex dump (first 32 bytes): >> > 00 00 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 02 01 05 00 00 02 01 ................ >> > 00 00 00 00 00 00 81 38 02 00 00 00 33 33 30 30 .......8....3300 >> > backtrace: >> > [<ffffffff81122d77>] create_object+0x127/0x2b0 >> > [<ffffffff813580b1>] kmemleak_alloc+0x21/0x50 >> > [<ffffffff8111f383>] __kmalloc_node_track_caller+0x153/0x220 >> > [<ffffffff812b703e>] __alloc_skb+0x7e/0x170 >> > [<ffffffffa0833331>] htc_connect_service+0x111/0x200 [ath9k_htc] >> > [<ffffffffa083bb90>] ath9k_init_htc_services+0x240/0x2b0 [ath9k_htc] >> > [<ffffffffa083c1ca>] ath9k_htc_probe_device+0xea/0xa50 [ath9k_htc] >> > [<ffffffffa08338dc>] ath9k_htc_hw_init+0xc/0x30 [ath9k_htc] >> > [<ffffffffa08356ba>] ath9k_hif_usb_probe+0x1ca/0x420 [ath9k_htc] >> > [<ffffffffa00a2279>] usb_probe_interface+0xb9/0x160 [usbcore] >> > [<ffffffff81279379>] driver_probe_device+0x89/0x1a0 >> > [<ffffffff8127958b>] __device_attach+0x4b/0x60 >> > [<ffffffff81278024>] bus_for_each_drv+0x64/0x90 >> > [<ffffffff81279231>] device_attach+0xa1/0xb0 >> > [<ffffffff81278a25>] bus_probe_device+0x25/0x40 >> > [<ffffffff81276d2a>] device_add+0x55a/0x630 >> > >> > The device is a TP-Link TL-WN722N. The output from lsusb is "ID 0cf3:9271 >> > Atheros Communications, Inc. AR9271 802.11n". >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Stable <stable@xxxxxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > >> > This patch certainly fixes a leak. I'm testing to see if there are >> > others. >> >> Hi Larry, >> >> thanks for finding this. >> I remember seeing this memleaks sometime back and thought this patch >> might help(i think same as yours with some more corner cases) >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1016752/ >> but I found there were still some memory leaks, I was unsure where I >> am missing. if you are sure that this addresses the issue, we can send >> a patch. > > Ping? Is this the patch we want? Or something else? Hi John, the complete patch is posted http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-wireless/msg75134.html Vasanth said that at some scenario's with the above patch it may cause some panics. based on the maintainers concerns/doubts lets drop this patch. myself and Larry still noticed few more memory leaks. I think we better drop this patch and fix it completely/tested. as I am with some other critical tasks we will soon address this. Larry if you have any thoughts, please share. > > John > -- > John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you > linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx might be all we have. Be ready. > -- shafi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
